Theo Verelst Diary Page

Latest: 7 december 2000

I've decided after good example to write some diary pages with toughts
and events.

Oh, in case anybody fails to understand, I'd like to remind them
that these pages are copyrighted, and that everything found here may not
be redistributed in any other way then over this direct link without my
prior consent. That includes familiy, christianity, and othercheats. The
simple reason is that it may well by that some people have been ill informed
because they've spread illegal 'copies' of mymaterials even with modifications.
Apart from my moral judgement, that is illegal, and will be treated as
such by me. Make as many references to these pages as you like, make hardcopies,
but only of the whole page, including the html-references, and without
changing a iota or tittel...

And if not? I won't hesitate to use legal means to correct wrong
that may be done otherwise. And I am serious. I usually am. I'm not sure
I could get 'attempt to grave emotional assault' out of it, but infrigement
on copyright rules is serious enough. And Jesus called upon us to respect
the authorities of state, so christians would of course never do such a
thing. Lying, imagine that.

Dec 7, 2000

Nazism

Some time ago, I read about nazism (again, I've sort of read 2/3 of
Mein Kampf a few ears ago, which, as I wrote before, is complete
non-sense, the sentences are wrong, the content of the information
is almost completely reversed in a not unambiguously re-invertable way,
and the logic is provably almost continuously wrong: complete bull),
and was again unpleasantly aware of the whole idea, including the
human sacrifices (not just the jews), the spiritual (looking at
pictures of soldiers and of course the little demagog it is hard
to escape that spiritually something affects them that is completely
empty in it stupidity and horror), and the fact that such a system
could actually make it to rule with cooperation of so many in this
'civilized' world, even only a few generations ago. Especially
after at least 7 years or so when Mein Kampf was incredible best seller
(millions of copies long before WW II).
The pictures made 'invasion of the body snatchers' association well up.
Horrible, the empty smiles even, the elevated nothingness except
greed for power and 'sich heil'.

Possibly dangerous there are persons even with certain distinctly
non-arian features that all to easily can make me imagine
raising their right arm and exclaiming 'sich heil' distinctly,
as being in with some christ himself. Normally hard to imagine,
but then again, collaborators where all over in 2d WW, and I've
even seem my personal brother (in a time I still had significant trust)
make the right arm greet on the road (while driving ahaed of me
on a motorbike) towars delft university quarters. COuld have various
meanings.

War in Europe is not anchient stuff, these things happended in the
hart of it, less then a lifetime ago. Unpleasant.

Imagine that there are even 'human beings' that flat out deny that the
holocoust ever took place. Or that have religions similarly
cruel, pointless and potentially powerfull.

Yesterday there was a university lecture about the underlying thoughts of
Nazism, it would have been interesting to hear it, at least it
may be of significant use that the subjects are brought forward.

National History

I picked up Longmans 'History of the United States of America'
(Hugh Brogan '85), to look
some things up (amoung others the whereabouts of the civil war and the
time of revolution, I didn't get to that yet), and to my surprise found
Revelation (III,7-8) quoted as heading of the chapter:

And to the angel of Philadelphia write: These things says the Holy
One, the True One, the (One) having the key of David, the (one)
opening, and no one shuts; and shuts, and no one opens: I know your
works. Behold, I have given before you a door being opened, and no
one is able to shut it, because you have little power, and have kept
My word, and have not denied My name.
and also
to other interesting ones:

General Henry Knox, 1777:
"It is the will of heaven that America be great -she may not deserve it-
her policy wretched, nay, her supiness in the past winter would, according
to the common operation of things, mark her for destruction."

General George Washington, 1776:
"Under a full persuation of the justice of our cause, I cannot entertain
an idea that it will finally sink, though it may remain for some time
under a cloud"

There an idea here that seems relevant: when all think it will
only be luctor and hardly ever emergo (a latin proverb known in Holland)
things are different than when we would be 'under a cloud' (probably
also refering to the israelites bing led in the desert) for some time.
Without thinking about 'shared subconscious' or even shared thoughts at
all, it seems that these type of general underlying thoughts will always
affect the way people think both individually and together. And that
thinking of course affect the way rules are made, laid down, and
adhered to.

Interestingly, in the foreword, Rupert Sheldrake, whose talks about
'morphogenetic fields', pigeons finding there homes back when
their tills are moves, boiling points decreasing with time, and
the increased capability of learning a certain topic when more people
worldwide have studied the same topic (seems true for humans, but also
for laboratory rats), struck me quite some years ago.
Also, I found that there is mention of the early settlers (trappers),
and there seem to be original sources from those days, the subject
being essential. I also had interest in the (originals!) of dutch sailers
just after the middle ages, it might be interesting to compare.

Affairs of state and the effective Modus Operandus

Questions I'm thinking about that have not bearing on contemporay
issues but span the whole of society at least in gouvernment and
leading ways are: how do things effectively run in a modern, western
country. Who gets elected and why is one way to look at it, but who runs
and why is another side to that coin, equally applicable in lower
governmental circuits, and even in companies, families, etc: how
is it determined what is right (the biblical term 'law' is not
unapplicable to describe (part of) the idea), and what structures are there
to deterine and enforce the results of that thinking.

In legal sense, it is clear enough normally what laws mean, and it
is assumed that citizens know the law (what is the 'Nulla poenna'
principle in dutch law b.t.w.?), which is doable for the obvious:
safety and honesty observed, no stealing, public means available
and maintained, justice enforcement of understandable kind,
inheritance and business rules, tax arrangements, etc., all
compreshensible political issues, know already in ancient greece,
and other old societies.

But how do things run on other levels, and what if the general
corruptability of man get more than a bit space? What if major religions
preach things, such as child abuse, that are illegal under a countries'
laws. Or if ultra right wing criminals would actually change the
rules into nazism? The latter case currently is doable: they wouldn't
ever even nearly get the required majority. The former is historical:
seperation of state and church is essential and may result of
eve true religions, ans conversely a church may have completely
unreasonable, undesireable and in-humane power (against what people
amoung eachother could probably agree on as besic rights that are
in need of being recognized), that may (again historically) result in
wars to break such power. In the Netherlands the catholic spanish
oppressors were kicked out because of their abusiveness, and because
obviously such religions enriched themselves over the backs of
people, during a long (80 years) war, a few centuries ago.

In other, not even 'second world' countries (such as italy) the
catholic and other doctrines may still be quite represented in
the state laws, such as concerning marriage, the english
pornography laws are another example.

It of course is easy to recognize in general that relgion in general
and in the western world the 'christian' religions have had and
still have major impact on societies formal makeup, though
secularisation seems to be a common phenomena, this is still
fundamental. Even the 10 commandments, regardless of how they have
been intended and translated are still recogniseably present in
fundamental rules.

I don't have many problems with the dutch or some other western
constitutions (but imagining I'd be born in iran or some other moslim
ruled society makes me uneasy), most rules are reasonable and
leave space for just and honorable behaviour, if applied right they
can easily be a blessing, in a certain type of christian language that
could easily be misunderstood. Without question in my mind these rules
in historic sense explain significant parts of the welfare in
western society for centuries, lets say since reformation/renaissance
time. Religeously, it is clear enough that for many subjects addressed
in law, religious lives are not impacted much and/or needed in direct
visible sense: just don't mess with eachother to much, distribute wealth
not too dishonest, keep justice systems bearable, and things should
be able to work.

Evidently, this depends on the capability of man to work right,
live right, be respectable and respected, obtain the essences of
life, etc. Arguably 'real' that is uncorrupted, honest, blissfull
christians may be of value in the whole of society to stop it
from becoming unbearable and corrupted to the core. That is a
matter of dealing with religeous matters, and it might be that
these matters are hard to measure, quantify and judge in practice.

I'm certain, that within the bounds of the possible in society,
much hidden evil can be both present and breeded in that area,
including the concept of (originally) babylonic sacrifical rites
and shame-based pyramid systems and more or less hidden maffia
types of organisations.

It seems to me that in certain environment such subjects are
such inherent parts of the normal operating mode of life, that
with some being known, it is almost impossible to ask for the
road with getting so much hidden message/ figurative language
content that one may wander wether people are seriously
deranged, plain stupid (to think I'm taking their religion
that is evil seriously as the religion I'd share with),
incapable of understanding 'normal life' interaction modes,
or just wacko/crazy. Whatch some tv to see some normal bahaviour?
Well well. Of course, but when I look at what some seem to want
to convey in their films/programs, I'm sure I'm looking at evil
babylon, including worshipping and listening to the
doctrines of deamons, and adhering to thoughts that either
nazism, catholicism in the general (...) broad sense of the
false religions word, that is including fake christians, or
fundament moslims in one way or another also seek to implement,
and which are horrifying to any normal human being.

Can I write all this? Yep. I can even under the duth constitution
AND under European Communion offical law make TV programs about it
even without being censored, at least not beforehand. Americans
call it freedom of speech, the term is not in these laws, but
similar rights are constitutionally guaranteed, check it out,
I put the constitution on a link on my home page, use the
page-search to find the articles. 'Vrijheid' could be a key word.
(in favour of progressing job-related activities I've not yet completely
translated the whole document).

Not that I otherwise would be affraid of uttering truth that much,
but imagine we'd live in the 50's++ russia, with the KGB behind
my back doing nothing but trying to make reports on me to
put me in the nuthouse as (this time?) political 'dissident'
(good word) or something. FAMILIAR PICTURE? Horrible thought.

Then again: suppose societies' effective tissue is one of a
bunch of motherf*'s making lives prepared for all those wonderfull
little 'christian' abuse victims, threatening them in ways the
stasi also 'invented' (I do think Alpha, the spanish catholic leader
that was stationed in holland before the 80 years war knew about
simular methods, probably on jesuit basis (found some interesting
reading onthe subject in that time)), then people may not experience
much of the fundamental rigths they have in this western world.
Yesterday I actually saw on CNN the term freedom being mentioned
in that context by the European Comittee itself. Isn't that something.
WOuld be also because of the unrecogniseable protesters downstairs
throuwing stones at the building? Donno.

In biblical terms? Revelation, without much question. 'get away from
here' about the great whore, picturing such horrible religeous systems,
to be free. Not to listen to the doctrines of deamons that will
just damn you and prepare you for the or some antichrist,
and to become another brick in the wall of some beastly system,
and be all to occupied with which janus head is to be replaced with which
other. Praying with people in gouvernment places is called
for, to lead quiet and peacefull lives, as it is pleasing for
God. Jesus himself did mention that some wars must happen though.

A related subject is, that I mentioned in the title: how do things
effectively get arranged. Do I become director of my fathers
company (reminds me of 'seaside rendez-vous', a nice Queen song
about similar things), or does the better manager, or the one
ending up the highest in some treasurous babylonic, child abuse
based system that through secret messages is appointed by the Pope
with aid or counter response of the mob? I wish I would have spanned
the range of possibilities roughly by such consideration, but
I'm sure I missed some extremes that in practice are way to determining
how people (have to) act. Vive le english king?

American history clearly teaches the english king ('rule the waves',
satanism included)
was very undesirable in terms of the rights desirable for nations
and their inhabitants. I only recenty found the paragraph long
fermenting about that power system in the bill of rights: no
unclearness here. Interesting too is that it is constitutionally
possible to overthrow the gouvernment by violence, if such unlikely
event should ever be desirable.

Imagine being a german rocket builder in '39, would I be theatened
to give my best services to the preparations for the third reich?

Less Heavyness

Any fun doing semi-cultural c.q. entertainment things? Well movies
are currently out for financial reasons (being worked on), but some
tv movies are worth it, even dirty Harry still works.
Even wonder about the reliability of of 'lip-talk'?
I used to like movie-houses, i.e. a bit alternative movies, some
clear in memory images may take on mew meaning.
Clipwise remarkable I'd find the Flintstones cartoon dubbed
'rage against the machine'-type YabbaDabbaDoo clip on the cartoon
channel. Nice. Refreshing. What would Dexter and DeeDee need for
their development?

The library in an amsterdam university library has some books on
computer music, not bad ones in fact, and recently I even found a
set of user manuals of the well known Synclavier, one of three
or four BIG computer synthesizer systems when that stuff was
booming, some 15-20 years ago, others being the Fairlight system,
with lightpen monitor, and the PPG system.

The actual manual that is: congratulations on your purchase,
this system is fitted with 5 1/4' disks that should be stored in
a safe place, start the machine up with the system disk in place,
and start the score editor by pressing keys ...

No demo song button it seems, but the technology is definately still
relevant today: sampling technology is comparable with current computer
based systems, minus that the synth is integrated, the amount
of signal processing is considerable, including filtering,
multi sampling, analysis, fourier synthesis, even general
convoltion filters (though warnings are issued that the machines
mips/flops rating isn't up to doing this real time: 'this
operation may take...')

In the same building Asterix at some point was an official research
object. I wonder where the officially present sonology/music science
department is physically located: could be interesting. In that
context it is tempting to see what I could do with the things
IRCAM (french computer related music institute, Centre Pompidou, Paris)
is presenting: web servers with interactive audio manipulations
are on the job-request list, as are sound-researchers, also
in my active areas.
After all I'm official EC resident.

Hewlett Packard has measurement systems with different kind of
myth like apearing properties (for engineers that is), some time
ago I looked them up, though that does take some effort: how about
measuring signal (harmonics) of signals up to 50 GIGA herz with
one machine: connect the wire, adjust the knobs and voila:
well over 100 dB (I think 140 or so) dynamic range of very high
accuracy spectrum peaks in to a frequency range 25 times higher
then the latest wirelesses. Ha.

I worked with a lesser (expensive) one at Dutch Telecom long
ago, and know these machines take major, major engineering and
r&d, interesting machines, pitty they don't make music?

The point here? I did a Tower of Power (the band not the motherf*, @^$*^
cristal chappel greed) song in a workshop: "what is hip" (funky
song). Is technology 'hip' ? I could have played the acoustic
piano, amped it right (a difficult enogh experiment I've succesfully
tried recently with my PPA system, see other pages), and the song
might have worked, but without a synthesizer or some other
funky key-instrument, a clavinet, maybe a rhodes or hammond,
the accompinment may not work too well. Synths plug in easier too, and
changing the sounds is nice.

In other words they make it possible to be artistically and practically
better of, evidently. That's not the same as saying synths are 'hip'
though of course there are not that many musisians that know how
to use em extensively.
I think the desirability lies in the scarcety and the pleasant
properties. But then again: many synths are available, and still
more is desirable, and certain ones make it possible to
make something either fashionable or particularly interesting or
even 'hip'. Two parameters here it would seem: technology, and
an artistic/musical measure, that isn't necessarily a fashionable
factor: some synths are long term hits. Technology is a given
factor in terms of maximum at a certain time: an interesting
factor in sound synthesiser world.

I'll be off to the (other) library to read up on various programming
subjects. Probably even in the weekend, imagine that. Even user interfaces
are in the attention: with the current computer possibilities in the
end it is still about how a user is going to use the machine.
(As an achievable idea: how about a
Linux based/Java interface/19inch/fast DSP enhanced self contained synth?)

I last week finally received the Conrad Electronics catalog, where
in the past I've invested in various electronics part such as
the PA amp chip, transformers, PCB stuff, a radio remote control
system. It's inspiring to read this stuff, makes me think about
all the possibilities of doing a good electronics and computer
design job. They even have 50cm size electrical remote controlled
choppers nowadays (they actually fly of course, about 7-15 minutes),
fun stuff. No blimps, though!

A very clear, relevant, and imo. relevant electronics design example
is a high quality push-pull end-stage, for instance as (power)
amplifier. I lookad at this example on one of my web pages,
see the 'engineering projects' and 'highlights' pages on my
web site. I've done spice (a well know electronics simulator
computer program) simulations with distortion analysis on the
page, with good enough results using reasonable parts and
very straightforward design logic. Not that a design of this
simple enough part complexity (few hands full of parts, as
opposed to pages full of diagrams) is simple by nature, hell no,
is an expression. Analysing the behaviour of one transistor alone
can be very elaborate. Spice models (that is a description file
for an electronics part in language which the spice program
understands) for the commonly known transistors I used may
easily contain dozens of parameters. In mechanical language:
sizes so-and-s0, cruising speed so-and-so, accelerations figures
so-and-so, maximum speed, type of tires, etc., just example
of course, but electronically speaking 20 or 30 of those kinds
of figures easily, depending a bit. For each transistor that, is,
and then the configuration in the schematic gives them
a certain behaviour. Not childs play at all, and in case of an
amplifier, the resulting sound quality is directly affected
by the quality of the design. In this case, it is predicted how
well the amplifier will reproduce a waveform on its input,
in terms of the percentage of the error on the output.

I'm not sure I did takeover distortion explicitly, that too would be
interesting. Thats when the transistor pulling the output signal up
is starting to take over from the transistor pulling the output
down. It is a distortion which is relatively bigger for small
signals, contrary to most other distortions which increase with
larger signals.